This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

  • Resolved

bq20z65 unsuccesful golden cycle attempts

I am working with a bq 20z65 fuel gauge. I have been attempting to run a golden cycle on the pack according to the instructions "when a close Qmax is not known in SLUA 334B".

From what I observed so far it looks like the Vok flag resets about 4 hours into the relaxation time after charging the pack. But there does not seem to be any change in the output voltage.My understanding is that for Qmax to update the Vok flag must be set. 

Is there a setting in the gg file that could affect this or cause this to happen?

  • In reply to Chase7071949597:

    One more thing. It appears that Cell 4 is quite imbalanced from the other 3 cells. It reaches charge terminate voltage more quickly and the CUV threshold much more quickly than the other 3 cells. You may want to look at that and make sure the cell isn't damaged or aged somehow.

  • In reply to Chase7071949597:

    The communication issue was most likely caused by another program periodically opening up on the computer I was using. The golden cycle was never disrupted during charge or discharge. The communication loss fornutately only happened during the relaxation periods. Also there were no power losses during the cycling. Tomorrow I am setting up another computer to run the cycling on.

    I am using chem ID 0404 which closely matches the discharge curve shown in the data sheet for these cells. The discharge curve is very flat. I could not find a chem ID specifically for the Valence IFR 18650 cells. Do you have a chem ID for these cells?

    The datasheet calls out 3.65 volts for the full charge voltage. There are 4 cells in series so I'm charging it to 14.4 volts at 675mA and and shutting off charge at 68mA taper current as the data sheet suggests. Should I raise the taper current up to prevent overcharge? What would you suggest?

    I am discharging at 270mA and cutting off discharge at 9.8 volts. The data sheet calls out min voltage per cell to 2.5 volts. I can raise the cut off to 10 volts.

    One other thing, I saw that  the gg file calls out the CUV Threshold at 1700mV. Is this too low for a cell that the min voltage is rated to 2.5 volts?

  • In reply to Mark Gaugenmaier:

    Can you send command 0008 to address 00 and then read back from the address? This will show us the chemistry ID. The reason I ask is becaus the default Ra table in the GG file you sent doesn't match the default Ra table for ID404.

    As for your cell, it doesn't look like we have ever characterized. The main concern you will have is potential accuracy issues by using the wrong ID. The typical process for cells is to send a few samples to TI and we characterize them and create a new ID. The process for LiFePO4 cells takes about 4 weeks. ID 404 is the correct type of chemistry, however, so if accuracy is acceptable once you get your learning cycle going, then we don't need to create a new ID for you.

    Your charge and discharge settings appear to be fine, then. I think we first need to figure out what ID is in the gauge.

  • In reply to Chase7071949597:

    I believe I sent you the wrong gg file.

    I may not have made a copy of the file with 0404 before we cycled it. But I just confirmed the ID to be 0404 with the 0008 command and I know the pack has not been disturbed since it was cycled. I exported the gg file and attached it for your review.

     I am also ordering  a fresh set of cells to eliminate the weak cell.

  • In reply to Chase7071949597:

    Hello Chase,


    I just completed another golden cycle. The data is attached. I included two copies of the gg file. One was exported just before cycling and the other copy was exported after cycling. I used brand new 18650 cells (IFR Valance same kind as last time). The chem ID is 0404. I followed the instructions "when no close Qmax is known" in your previous post. I am using the 20z45R1 TI EVM board for the cycling.

    The Max Error is still at 100%, so Qmax did not update. Please take a look at the data and see if you can see anything that might be causing the problem.

    I also need to do golden cycling on the 26650 version of these cells but I haven't started that until I can resolve the issue with the 18650 version. 

  • In reply to Mark Gaugenmaier:


    It looks like the issue is related to the ID. The ID isn't quite right for your cell. There is a parameter in the gauge that prevents Qmax updates if an OCV reading is taken during a portion of the voltage curve that is too flat. It helps prevent large errors in accuracy. Unfortunately this means we will need to to obtain 2 or 3 cell samples from you so we can create a new ID specific to this cell. I'll send you a friend invite so that I can give you the contact information of the person who will be doing the characterization.

  • In reply to Chase7071949597:

    Thanks Chase, I appreciate your quick response. I would think that the same would apply to the 26650 cells since they are from the same mfg.

    What would be your opinion?


    Would you post the invite here or send it to my email?

  • In reply to Mark Gaugenmaier:

    Did you not receive my friend request? If not, click on my screen name in one of my forum posts. There should be an Add as Friend link on the right side of the screen.

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.